According to Tony, the UK is hesitant to get involved in Syria because of what happened in Iraq...though not, he quickly points out, because of the fact that we went into that war on false pretences...oh no, according to Saint Tony, it was our failure to deal with the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq that has left us hesitant.
Now, far be it for me to argue with a former PM, but I think people here in the UK, appalled as we all are by the use of chemical weapons in Syria, actually don't want to go charging into another Middle Eastern country for the following reasons:
- Whilst it's pretty likely that Assad was behind the attack, forgive us (after Iraq) for not believing either the US or UK governments when they claim to have 'conclusive proof' of who was behind it - after all, we never did find those weapons of mass destruction or the capability to launch those weapons in 45 minutes in Iraq, did we? (But we did find a shit-load of oil!!)
- It's a bit rich for us to one year talk about the importance of UN resolutions as a mandate for military intervention and then, because we can't actually get one (yes, Russia and China, that's because of you and you still should be ashamed of yourselves!) we decide we don't actually need UN approval anyway.
- We are still trying to get ourselves out of Afghanistan!
- We're sick and tired of trying to police the world, and paying for the privilege.
So, forgive me, Lord Blair of Cheam, if I don't subscribe to the argument that we are hesitant to attack a few buildings in Syria with missiles because we don't know how to end wars; I think we're hesitant because, under your leadership, we learnt about the folly of getting involved in a war, however barbaric, which we can never really win, based on all the wrong reasons!
